I love Charles Haddon Spurgeon. I named my middle son after him. One of his sermon manuscripts marked by his own hand hangs in my office. I count him among the greatest, if not the greatest of English-speaking preachers to have ever lived. Needless to say, I’m a fanboy.
Yet I always find it ironic when seminaries and other Christian groups that host events, seminars, or training dedicated to expository preaching defined only as proceeding verse-by-verse through sections of Scripture1 also pay homage to the pulpit ministry of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a man who to my knowledge didn’t preach expositional sermons as they’ve delineated it.2
Often, Spurgeon’s sermons would open with one verse as a reference text and after some initial addressing of said text, he’d be off to the races with stories, points, and appeals, rarely returning to the initial verse. When it comes to how we think about preaching styles in modern terminology, Spurgeon leans more toward topical than expository-as-defined.3
Heresy? Not really. Sample Spurgeon’s sermons for yourself. I’d argue evangelicals do with Spurgeon like they do with many great leaders of the faith (Augustine, Luther, etc.): quote easily, read rarely. But the fact that Spurgeon was more topical than expository is hard to miss if you actually read his sermons. I’m not alone. Indeed, Phil Johnson, founder of The Spurgeon Archive, sees the exact same thing:
It’s true that Spurgeon was not an expository preacher. In fact, he regarded biblical exposition as something distinct from “preaching.” His approach to “exposition” was simply to read a phrase and comment on it. Some of his printed sermons include an “Exposition” section, but the “exposition” was a whole different part of the worship service, distinct from the preaching.
This doesn’t mean Spurgeon misapplied texts or took them out of context.4 His sermon’s bled Scripture when cut and took aim at the glory of Jesus. Even so, that doesn’t take away the fact that his style wasn’t given to preaching through a book of the Bible or working through large sections of Scripture in a verse-by-verse manner that many preaching leaders today would promote.5 Johnson thankfully adds, “Normally, [Spurgeon] at least took time to explain both the context and the meaning of his text, even if he then departed from the text and its context into a more topical kind of message.” So while this keeps us fanboys from tearing our Spurgeon t-shirts and smashing our Spurgeon pint glasses in grief, the truth still remains. Yea verily it has been said unto you, from the guy who founded The Spurgeon Archive, that the Prince of Preachers was a topical preacher.
Say it with me, “Spurgeon was a topical preacher.” You can do it.
The point of all this isn’t to say expository preaching, or what I believe is more clearly defined as verse-by-verse preaching, isn’t good.6 It is very much so. In fact, I just preached through Romans 9:1-27 this past Sunday. There are some things verse-by-verse and Bible book preaching does that topical cannot do. Yet, that shouldn’t move us to short-change or vilify topical preaching. One must still exposit the texts correctly – giving them the right context and interpretation – no matter how many are used in any given message.7 Topical preaching also does things verse-by-verse or Bible book preaching can’t do. That’s why my own preaching strategy employs both: sermons through Bible books (or big sections within them) and topical messages.
And why not? I consider both expository. So for using the former, I’ve got tons of wonderful Christian leaders today cheering me on. For the latter, well…I’ve got Spurgeon. 😉